Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Schizothymia


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result was keep. PeaceNT 02:18, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Schizothymia

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete this stub. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. This disorder is not a DSM-IV disorder. Article is utterly unsupported by sources. Doczilla 04:58, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. If Encarta has an article about it, albeit a short one, I think it's notable enough to be here. See also the sources linked here. Also, while there aren't any references, lack of references in the article isn't a reason to delete. Next time, please do a cursory Google search for references or something to establish that a subject isn't original research or that it is notable. —Disavian (talk/contribs) 05:27, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - this term for this disorder is in reasonably widespread use in scientific literature and appears to be defined in all major dictionaries. --Hyperbole 07:41, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. A cursory search turns up several journal articles dealing with this condition. And let's not forget that DSM-IV hasn't undergone a major update in almost 15 years. &mdash; dust mite  14:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, in agreement with current discussion. -- Dennis The Tiger  (Rawr and stuff) 20:04, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as above. – Mike . lifeguard  &#124; @en.wb 21:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.